Donor Mapping: Climate Change and Agriculture Activities November 2013

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | November 2013

Page 1 of 48

Acknowledgements Meridian Institute gratefully acknowledges the support of the Rockefeller Foundation and the participation of the organizations and individuals who took part in the interview process.

About Meridian Institute Meridian Institute is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to help people solve problems, make informed decisions, and find solutions to some of society’s most complex and controversial issues. Meridian’s mission is accomplished through applying collaborative problem-solving approaches including facilitation, mediation, and other strategic consultation services. Meridian works at the local, national, and international levels and focuses on a wide range of issues related to natural resources and environment, energy, and climate change, agriculture and food security, sustainability, global stability, and health. For more information, please visit www.merid.org.

About The Rockefeller Foundation The Rockefeller Foundation supports work that expands opportunity and strengthens resilience to social, economic, health and environmental challenges—affirming its pioneering philanthropic mission since 1913 to promote the well-being of humanity. The Foundation operates both within the United States and around the world. The Foundation's efforts are overseen by an independent Board of Trustees and managed by its president through a leadership team drawn from scholarly, scientific, and professional disciplines. For more information, please visit www.rockefellerfoundation.org.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | November 2013

Page 2 of 48

Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3 Overview ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Donor Profiles ............................................................................................................................................. 5 

African Development Bank (AfDB) ............................................................................................ 6



Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA) ................................................................................... 8



Climate & Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) ....................................................... 10



David and Lucile Packard Foundation .................................................................................... 12



Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development Canada (DFATD) .............................................. 14



Department for International Development of the United Kingdom (DFID) .................... 16



Ford Foundation ......................................................................................................................... 18



Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation ...................................................................................... 20



Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) ............................................................................... 21



International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) ................................................... 23



McKnight Foundation ................................................................................................................ 25



The Rockefeller Foundation ...................................................................................................... 27



Skoll Foundation ......................................................................................................................... 29



Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture ................................................................. 31



United States Agency for International Development (USAID) .......................................... 33



World Bank Agriculture and Environmental Services .......................................................... 35



World Bank BioCarbon Fund .................................................................................................... 37

Donor-Identified Trends ......................................................................................................................... 39 Meridian Observations ............................................................................................................................ 42 Possible Areas for Future Exploration .................................................................................................. 47 Report Authors and Contact Information ............................................................................................ 48

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | November 2013

Page 3 of 48

Executive Summary During the summer of 2013 Meridian Institute interviewed seventeen donors funding climate change and agriculture activities, including multilateral, bilateral, and philanthropic funders. This effort was supported by The Rockefeller Foundation and was intended to provide a landscape overview of the nature of the activities being supported by the range of donors interviewed. Meridian used the information provided in these interviews to assemble two-page donor profiles that have been reviewed, edited, and approved by the interviewees. These profiles describe donor activities along four categories:    

Climate change and agriculture activities, Financing for climate change and agriculture, Geographic emphasis, and Donor evolution over time.

The donors provided significant additional information that was not captured in these profiles, which was broken into donor-identified substantive and funding trends. Donor-identified substantive trends included: climate change mainstreaming across existing donor programs; elevation of gender issues; growing interest in landscape-scale, integrated approaches; and increased availability of and access to high quality data. Donor-identified funding trends include: bilateral donors collaborating to engage multilateral implementation partners; increasing activity by small philanthropies alone and in collaboration with others; public-private partnerships that combine grantmaking with investments of money and technology; shifting relationship between traditional development assistance and resultsbased payments; and growing private sector interest in long-term supply chain sustainability. Following the donor profiles and donor-identified trends, Meridian drew conclusions about the available information through multiple lenses of analysis, including:   

The significance of donors using shared terms, often with different definitions, in describing activities, Different donor entry points into the climate change and agriculture arena, and The varying definitions and views of partnerships.

The assessment concludes with a collection of possible areas for future exploration, including:   

A more complete characterization of donors and investors in the climate change and agriculture space, A more detailed examination of the meta-funding trends, and Better accounting of the range and categorization of climate change co-benefits.1

Co-benefits are positive outcomes associated with a particular undertaking that occur in addition to the planned benefit. For example, reductions in greenhouse gas emissions or improved resilience to weather disturbances achieved through implementation of on-farm practices intended to improve water quality. 1

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | November 2013

Page 4 of 48

Overview This assessment was motivated by a sense that there is a growing body of investment and donor experience in agriculture and climate change, and that increased awareness of these investments and experience could assist current and prospective donors better understand each other’s work. For example, at the conclusion of a Meridian-convened Learning from Early Experiences and Interventions Workshop in Rome, Italy in November 2012 participants, donors, and implementers alike indicated that a lack of collective knowledge about what is being funded and what lessons could be drawn from that funding is resulting in missed opportunities for innovation and collaboration. They suggested that an improved, even rudimentary, understanding of donor substantive and geographic emphases and identification of some trends in financial support for climate change and agriculture activities could benefit many who are active in this arena. The project team conducted structured one-hour interviews with bilateral, multilateral, and philanthropic donors; donor alliances; and other funders during the summer of 2013. The interviews were organized to allow for maximum interaction and dialogue. Five overarching questions guided the interviews: 1. What are the areas of emphasis of your organization’s climate change and agriculture funding? 2. How long has your organization been funding climate change and agriculture activities? How and why was it initiated? 3. Are there particular substantive or geographic areas of focus? Have these changed over time? 4. What is the relative percentage of funding allocated to each of your organization’s focus areas? Has this changed over time? Might it change? 5. Do you have any funding partners on these efforts? This project was designed as an exploratory effort that focused on a cross-section of funders. This assessment does not include the complete set of all donors engaged in climate change and agriculture. In this regard the interviews confirmed that there is a broadening and increasingly diverse community of donors and actors supporting climate change and agriculture work, including the private sector, new and evolving public-private partnerships, small philanthropies, emerging economy aid agencies, and impact investors.2 Many of those interviewed suggested that any potential further work should consider: 1) including an even more diverse range of entities engaged in climate change and agriculture

Impact investing is a form of socially responsible investing in which investors channel funds into companies or organizations to generate measurable social and environmental impact in addition to financial returns. 2

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | November 2013

Page 5 of 48

funding and finance and 2) exploring emerging substantive and funding trends in greater detail.

Donor Profiles Meridian Institute conducted interviews with seventeen bilateral, multilateral, philanthropic donors and donor alliances. The following profiles are designed to present a snapshot of the work each donor supports across four categories:    

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture Geographic Emphasis Donor Evolution

The donor profiles, including all figures and percentages, were reviewed by the relevant donor. Since many donors integrate their climate change and agriculture funding with other priorities many funding numbers included in this assessment are approximations. On the maps included in each profile, dots represent countries, stars represent regions where projects are underway, and ellipses represent a global focus. The donors profiled include: o

African Development Bank

o

Climate and Land Use Alliance

o

Climate Development Knowledge Network

o

David and Lucile Packard Foundation

o

Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (Canada)

o

Department for International Development (United Kingdom)

o

Ford Foundation

o

Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation

o

Inter-American Development Bank

o

International Foundation for Agricultural Development

o

McKnight Foundation

o

The Rockefeller Foundation

o

Skoll Foundation

o

Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture

o

United States Agency for International Development

o

World Bank Agriculture and Environmental Services

o

Word Bank BioCarbon Fund

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | African Development Bank • November 2013

Page 6 of 48

African Development Bank (AfDB) The African Development Bank (AfDB) is charged with promoting sustainable economic development and social progress in its 53 regional member countries. AfDB’s objectives are aligned with the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. http://www.afdb.org/en/ Climate Change and Agriculture Activities AfDB advances climate adaptation and resilience through investments in sustainable development including sustainable agriculture, water resources, development, health, and climate risk reduction. There are a number of points of intersection between the AfDB’s work on agriculture and adaptation to climate change: 

Climate Change Action Plan: This plan spans from 2011-2015, and rests on three pillars: o low-carbon development; o climate change adaptation; and o a climate change funding platform that is implementable through a variety of financing options.

Quick Facts Donor Type: Multilateral Founded: 1964 Composition: 53 African countries (regional members), 24 non-African countries (non-regional members) Time Funding Climate Change and Agriculture: Climate Change, 8 years; Agriculture, 49 years Total Annual Funding: $4.25 billion (in 2012) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A (does not track climate and agriculture designated funding) Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities:   

Mitigation Adaptation Climate-resilient agriculture

The plan operationalizes the AfDB’s Climate Risk Mitigation and Adaptation Strategy focused on funding initiatives that promote and facilitate adaptation to climate change across multiple sectors. This Strategy includes mitigating the economic costs of climate change on the African agricultural sector. The Climate Change Action Plan includes measures to “climate-proof” agricultural projects by screening for climate risks and improving climate resilience. The plan also aims to develop carbon accounting to quantify and offset emissions related to agricultural practices and seeks to build adaptive capacity throughout the African continent. Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture AfDB provided $381.7 million to agriculture and food security programming in 2012. Since AfDB’s funding for climate change mitigation and adaptation is mainstreamed across all sectors, AfDB does not track how much of its agricultural programming includes climate change mitigation and adaptation measures.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | African Development Bank • November 2013

Page 7 of 48

Geographic Emphasis African Continent (53 countries): Infrastructure development in energy, agriculture and environment, water, and sanitation Donor Evolution AfDB has been funding initiatives The star represents the region in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities. related to crop irrigation, livestock development, forestry and plantation agriculture since its founding in 1964. The creation (2008) and operationalization (2011) of the Climate Risk Mitigation and Adaptation strategy represents a concerted shift toward implementing a focus on climate in investments for agricultural development, among other initiatives. AfDB recently launched a Ten Year Strategy for 2013-2022 which includes two objectives: o inclusive growth and o transition to green growth. Agriculture and food security is one of three areas of special emphasis within this strategy. To implement the Ten Year Strategy, AfDB will continue its work to leverage funding streams to meet the financing demands for low-carbon and climate-resilient development in Africa, including in the agricultural sector.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | CLUA • November 2013

Page 8 of 48

Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA) The Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA) is a collaborative initiative of the ClimateWorks Foundation, David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Ford Foundation, and Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation that seeks to catalyze the potential of forested and agricultural landscapes to mitigate climate change, benefit people, and protect the environment. The bulk of CLUA’s programming is related to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries, including the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+).3

Quick Facts

http://www.climateandlandusealliance.org/

Time Funding in Climate Change and Agriculture: 3.5 years

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities From its inception 3.5 years ago CLUA has been funding agriculture and climate change in two areas:

Donor Type: Alliance of philanthropic foundations Founded: 2010 Composition: Alliance between:    

David & Lucile Packard Foundation Ford Foundation Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation ClimateWorks Foundation

Total Annual Funding: ~$50 million Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~25%



Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Agriculture as a driver of deforestation: Funding Change and Agriculture Activities: focuses on both supply and demand for palm oil,  Agriculture as a driver of paper, and pulp in Indonesia, and soy and deforestation livestock in Brazil. Demand side funding  Greenhouse gas mitigation emphasizes the introduction of sustainability into  Biofuels development supply chains and the avoidance of sourcing key commodities from areas with high rates of deforestation. On the supply side, CLUA funds in-country action to improve sustainability for several key commodities.



Agriculture emissions (separate from forests): Several members of CLUA (primarily the Packard Foundation) invest in US-based measures to encourage offsets for greenhouse gas emissions and change on-farm practices.

REDD+ was introduced at the 13th Conference of Parties in 2007 as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiations in Bali, Indonesia. REDD+ a mechanism to develop policies to curb emissions from deforestation and forest degrading activities and to enhance forests’ capacity to remove greenhouse gases through afforestation and reforestation in developing countries. More information about REDD+ is available at: http://www.un-redd.org. 3

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | CLUA • November 2013

Page 9 of 48

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture Climate and Ag 25%

Other Initiatives 75%

Approximately 25% of CLUA’s funding profile is related to agriculture and climate change. This is equally split between drivers of deforestation, agricultural emissions, and biofuels. Geographic Emphasis Brazil: Agriculture as a driver of deforestation for soy and livestock production; biofuels (supply-side) Indonesia: Agriculture as a driver of deforestation for palm oil; biofuels (supply-side)

United States: Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions by incorporating conservation measures into US agricultural producers’ practices; biofuels (both supply & demand sides) Global: Climate and land use, including eliminating forest and peat land conversion and degradation, and REDD+ Donor Evolution

The dots represent countries in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities. The ellipse represents a global focus.

Historically, CLUA has primarily concentrated funding efforts related to REDD+. A recent external review of CLUA’s programs identified agriculture as a “missing piece” of the Alliance’s overall grant making portfolio. As a result, several CLUA members have shifted resources more specifically to agricultural practices in addition to forested landscapes, a trend that will continue in the coming years. For example, the Packard Foundation has shifted resources to invest $10 million per year to work on greenhouse gas emissions mitigation from agriculture, and the Moore Foundation is shifting its historical approach of biodiversity to drivers of deforestation, taking a commodity-based approach. CLUA is also investing in an effort to identify existing opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | CDKN • November 2013

Page 10 of 48

Climate & Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) The Climate & Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) is an alliance of organizations with a hub in London and implementing partners in Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, and Africa. CDKN is funded by the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) and the Netherlands Directorate-General for International Development (DGIS). CDKN supports decision-makers design and deliver climate compatible development by combining research, advisory services, and knowledge management on four strategic themes: 1) climate compatible development strategies and plans; 2) improving developing countries’ access to climate finance; 3) strengthening resilience through climaterelated disaster risk management; and 4) supporting climate negotiators from least developed and most vulnerable countries. CDKN works in partnership with decision-makers in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors nationally, regionally and globally.

Quick Facts Donor Type: Alliance of organizations Founded: 2010 Composition: Funding partnership between:



Climate-smart agriculture: Three projects apply the triple-win of adaptation, mitigation, and economic benefits and social development.



Netherlands DirectorateGeneral for International Development (DGIS)

    

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities



United Kingdom Department for International Development

Alliance managed between several implementing partners:

http://cdkn.org/

Agriculture and food security are cross-cutting themes spanning 35 of CDKN’s projects focused on climate compatible development. Twenty-six of these are research projects implemented by partnerships between research institutions, ministries, universities, and non-governmental organizations. Nine are technical assistance projects administered through government channels. The projects on climate compatible development through an agriculture lens span several categories:





PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano INTRAC LEAD International Overseas Development Institute (ODI) SouthSouthNorth

Time Funding Climate Change and Agriculture: 3 years Total Funding: £72 million over 5 years (2010 – 2015) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~5% Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities: 

Climate-smart agriculture

Ground-level adaptation: Fourteen projects explore how to adapt to climate change in the agriculture sector, particularly at the community and local levels. For example, how to bridge and appreciate commonalities between indigenous and scientific knowledge.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | CDKN • November 2013

Page 11 of 48



Adaptive capacity: Thirteen projects directly or indirectly investigate the conditions necessary to improve adaptive capacity at community, sub-national and/or national level to achieve food and water security and ecosystem service improvement.



Biodiversity, ecosystem services, and food and water security: Eight projects examine the link between water, food, energy, and climate security; measure changes in resilience to climate impacts on those factors; and explore innovative mechanisms to promote improved land management.



Poverty alleviation: Eight projects center directly on delivering adaptation and poverty alleviation in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries through improved agricultural practices and encouraging land use and land management strategies that enhance carbon storage. Climate and Ag ~5%

Other Activities ~85%

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture CDKN is jointly funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Netherlands Directorate-General for International Cooperation (DGIS). CDKN has disbursed £4 million to date for projects related to climate change and agriculture. Geographic Emphasis

CDKN’s work on climate compatible development tied to agriculture is based in eastern Africa. A number of projects are also in Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as South and South-East Asia.

The stars represent regions in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities.

Donor Evolution CDKN is a five-year program initiated in 2010 and scheduled to conclude in 2015. The theme of agriculture and food security emerged during the second year of CDKN’s operations and continues to evolve based on project developments. CDKN draws from lessons generated from ongoing and past projects to develop its portfolio of work. An important element of CDKN’s strategic approach to informing decision-making is knowledge management. CDKN clearly communicates about ongoing work by publishing stories, policy briefs, and blogs with up-todate information and analysis. Continual knowledge management helps CDKN draw lessons from work and present those lessons for external review and use. This is a primary tenet in CDKN’s belief that key messages, research, policy-making, and communications are mutually beneficial.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Packard Foundation • November 2013

Page 12 of 48

David and Lucile Packard Foundation The Packard Foundation uses the lens of science to support work to improve the human condition and to restore the planet’s health. The Foundation works primarily on issues related to improving the lives of children, enabling the creative pursuit of science, advancing reproductive health, and conserving and restoring the earth’s natural systems.

Quick Facts

http://www.packard.org/

Total Annual Funding: $252 million (grants awarded in 2012)

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities The Foundation’s agriculture strategy was one component of a 2008 commitment to provide $500 million over seven years to support work on climate change mitigation. Approximately $100 million of that commitment is dedicated to land use mitigation opportunities. The Foundation’s work on agriculture and climate includes three core activities:

Donor Type: Philanthropic Foundation Founded: 1964 Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 5 years

Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~4% ($10 million USD annually) Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities: 

Emissions mitigation



Biofuels Policy and Markets: The Foundation’s work supports the creation of a global set of biofuels sustainability standards, encouraging government and industry to implement those standards, and reforming policies incentivizing the development of unsustainable biofuels. These efforts were designed to ensure that the growing interest in biofuels does not result in increased GHG emissions and does not have other negative impacts on the environment and food security.



Climate Policy and Practice: The Foundation provides funds to develop protocols for measuring reductions in agriculture emissions and incorporating agricultural offsets in GHG compliance markets. This work is focused on the California cap-and-trade program.



Food and Farm Policy and Practice: This work includes research and advocacy to maintain and increase funding for conservation programs included in the US Farm Bill, to support the inclusion of emissions mitigation as a component of conservation, and to promote reform of policies resulting in increases greenhouse gas emissions.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Packard Foundation • November 2013

Page 13 of 48

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture Climate and Ag 4%

The Foundation’s annual budget of approximately $10 million to fund its agriculture work is evenly divided between biofuels, climate policy, and U.S. food and farm policy.

Other Initiatives 96%

Geographic Emphasis Global: Biofuels United States: Climate Policy and Practice & Food and Farm Policy and Practice

The dot represents a country in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities. The ellipse represents a global focus.

Donor Evolution To date, the Foundation’s support for climate change and agriculture has had the goals of reducing the greenhouse gas emissions and nitrogen pollution caused by agricultural practices in the United States and by biofuels production globally. The Foundation has resources allotted for agriculture and climate programming through the end of 2014 when its seven-year commitment to support climate change mitigation initiatives will conclude. The work on biofuels and climate policy will remain largely the same during this time period, while the United States federal farm policy work is likely to be scaled back. In the future, the Foundation will reallocate some of the resources previously directed toward federal farm policy work in two new areas: 1)support for supply chain approaches to agricultural emissions reductions from agriculture and 2) increased support for international efforts to reduce emissions from agricultural practices. This international approach will include close coordination with Packard’s partners in the CLUA (see above) and may involve greater attention to palm oil production in Indonesia and exploration of other opportunities to reduce emissions from agriculture. The Foundation’s funding for climate and agriculture beyond 2014 is yet to be determined.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | DFATD • November 2013

Page 14 of 48

Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development Canada (DFATD, formerly Canadian International Development Agency, CIDA) In 2013, Canada established the Department of Quick Facts Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD) Donor Type: Bilateral merging the former Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) with the Department of Founded: 1968 (CIDA); 2013 (DFATD) Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT). Time Granting in Climate Change DFATD is charged with directing and implementing and Agriculture: >10 years Canada’s international development and humanitarian assistance programs in addition to its Total Annual Funding: C$3.2 billion foreign affairs and international trade functions. (for 2012) Canada applies three cross-cutting themes to its development programming: increasing environmental Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A (does sustainability, advancing equality between women not track climate and agriculture and men, and helping to strengthen governance designated funding) institutions and practices. The first of these themes is the one most directly related to funding for the issue of climate change and agriculture. http://www.international.gc.ca/international/index.aspx?lang=eng Climate Change and Agriculture Activities The information below details historic CIDA funding activities given the transition taking place during the writing of this report. Historically there have been several specific channels through which Canadian development assistance has sought to impact climate change and agriculture. This has primarily included adaptation and productivity with little emphasis on mitigation: 

DFATD’s Food Security Strategy: This work is focused on meeting sustainable agricultural development targets smallholder farmers in developing countries, and includes climate change considerations. Programming includes adaptation for smallholder agriculture, climate-smart agriculture, and climate finance, among other topics.



Fast Start Financing Initiatives: In 2009, Canada pledged C$1.2 billion over 3 years (20102012) to fund fast-start climate change programming initiatives deployed through a range of partners. Approximately 26% of the fast start funds (or C$312 million) have been dedicated specifically to adaptation, forestry, and agriculture-related projects.

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture CIDA allocated climate funds through bilateral, multilateral, and partnership program channels. CIDA’s bilateral approach related to food security has traditionally been responsive to grantees’ interest and need. CIDA’s multilateral climate funding has largely been channeled through large climate change funds administered by multilateral institutions.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | DFATD • November 2013

Page 15 of 48

In 2012/13, 21% of CIDA’s annual budget of C$3.2 billion was channeled into food security programming. In the past 4 years (2009-2014), an average of about C$320 million (or 40% of all food security disbursements) has been annually allocated to sustainable agricultural development, which includes a climate change lens. Geographic Emphasis Sustainable Agricultural Development: Sub-Saharan Africa, Central America, Southeast Asia Fast Start Financing Initiatives: Latin America/Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, East Asia/Pacific Donor Evolution

The stars represent regions in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities.

CIDA adopted an environmental sustainability policy in 1992 and managed the Canada Climate Change Development Fund from 2000 to 2005 with a budget of C$100 million over 5 years. The Department recently adopted the new OECD climate change adaptation policy marker to better examine climate change spending under different programs including food security and agriculture-related initiatives.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | DFID • November 2013

Page 16 of 48

Department for International Development of the United Kingdom (DFID) The charge of the Department for International Development of the United Kingdom (DFID) is to promote sustainable development and eliminate world poverty. DFID funds education, health, social services, water supply and sanitation, government and civil society, economic activities, environmental protection, research, and humanitarian assistance. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/depar tment-for-international-development Climate Change and Agriculture Activities DFID’s work on climate change and agriculture is directed through several mechanisms: 

International Climate Fund (ICF): This is the UK’s fund designed to provide climate finance. Up to 50% of the ICF is targeted at helping the world’s poorest populations adapt to climate change, including through CDKN (see above). The balance of the ICF is used to support investments in low carbon development (30%) and forestry (20%). Many of the activities funding adaptation are related to agriculture and food security.

Quick Facts Donor Type: Bilateral Founded: 1997 (formerly it was the Overseas Development Administration) Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 20 + years (early 1990’s) Total Annual Funding: £6.7 billion (overall) and £1.4 billion (capital) in 2011-2012 Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A (does not track climate and agriculture designated funding) Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities:   

Climate-smart and climateresilient agriculture Adaptation with a focus on cobenefits Sustainable intensification



Evaluation and Indicators: DFID partnered with several other organizations4 to jointly develop a Food Security Learning Framework. DFID aims to undertake similar work to demonstrate useful thematic indicators on agriculture. DFID is building on this to develop thematic indicators on adaptation and agriculture for the International Climate Fund. These will be used for impact and strategic evaluations.



Research funding: DFID supports the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) including a research program on Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security. DFID also supports bilateral programs that include research on climate change and agriculture. One example is a joint program with the International Development Research Centre on the Collaborative Adaptation Research Initiative in Africa and Asia. DFID also

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Millennium Challenge Corporation, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), US Agency for International Development (USAID), World Bank, and World Food Programme. 4

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | DFID • November 2013

Page 17 of 48

supports research into the sustainable intensification of agriculture including the development of the new agriculture technology, products and knowledge needed to combat future threats to the global food system including climate change. This includes work on the development of metrics and research on the trade-offs involved in sustainable intensification, support to transformative approaches such as support to C4 rice and water efficient maize for Africa. 

Country programs: DFID has a devolved structure, and under its country programmes supports projects at a national level that incude support to climate change, food and nutrition security.

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture The ICF was designed to provide £2.9 billion for climate-related issues between 2011 and 2015. Agriculture comprises a significant component of the 50% of ICF funds targeted at helping the world’s poorest populations adapt to climate change. DFID’s flagship investment is £150 million to IFAD’s Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Program (ASAP). DFID also supports the role of private sector in development through public-private partnerships focused on improving farmers’ access to markets and developing agricultural value chains. Geographic Emphasis Global: Focus on Africa and South Asia through multi-lateral investments. Climate-smart and Climate Resilient Agriculture: Southern Africa, South Asia, and Brazil Donor Evolution

The stars represent regions and the dot represents a country in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities. The oval represents a global focus.

DFID has been funding work related to climate variability and research programs through the CGIAR and other institutions for several decades. DFID established a natural resource research program 1992, which included an implicit understanding of the connection between climate variability and agriculture. DFID began explicitly financing agriculture projects through a climate change lens in the 2000’s, including supporting the founding the CGIAR research program on Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security in 2010. Also in 2010, DFID began to work specifically on climate change in the context of agriculture and forestry through the use of climate financing. DFID will continue to develop metrics and performance indicators for the ICF to track the results and impact of investment. DFID is also developing the “Future Fit Initiative” to determine what strategic shifts in key sectors, including food, are needed to respond to the challenges of climate change and resource scarcity in achieving development objectives.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Ford Foundation • November 2013

Page 18 of 48

Ford Foundation The Ford Foundation works toward four goals through its programming: strengthen democratic values, reduce poverty and injustice, promote international cooperation, and advance human achievement.

Quick Facts

http://www.fordfoundation.org/

History of Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 3 years

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities The primary focus of Ford’s climate work is on REDD+. Ford organizes all its funding around initiatives. Three of these initiatives relate to agriculture, including climate change: 

Expanding Community Rights Over Natural Resources: Improves natural resource policies and programs to provide poor and marginalized groups with access and ownership over natural resources, including land-use planning and development

Donor Type: Philanthropic Foundation Founded: 1936

Total Annual Funding: ~$478 million (in FY 2012) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~6% Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities:   

Biofuels development Land use, tenure, and rights Resource management



Climate Change Responses that Strengthen Rural Communities: Addresses flawed policies in order to better promote sustainable land and resource management to help mitigate climate change (note: funding allocated through this initiative is almost entirely channeled through CLUA, and is largely related to REDD+ policies)



Expanding Livelihood Opportunities for Poor Households: Centers on developing value chains and improving delivery systems. Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture Climate and Ag 6%

Other Initiatives 94%

These three initiatives together, which comprise all of Ford’s grant making related to climate change and agriculture, comprise roughly 6% of Ford’s annual $478 million in grants.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Ford Foundation • November 2013

Page 19 of 48

Geographic Emphasis Expanding Community Rights Initiative: Mexico and Central America, Brazil, East Africa, India, Indonesia, China Climate Change Responses Initiative: Indonesia Expanding Livelihood Opportunities Initiative: Mexico and Central America, West Africa, East Africa, Southern Africa, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Indonesia Donor Evolution Ford Foundation has been involved in international agriculture since the early 1960’s when Ford partnered with the The Rockefeller Foundation in supporting preparatory activities leading to the founding of the CGIAR in 1971 and other initiatives during the Green Revolution. Ford’s The stars represent regions and the dots represent countries in which this efforts shifted to agricultural systems donor supports climate change and agriculture activities. in the 1970’s to take into account more diverse and resource-poor areas. Ford began supporting work on forestry and related issues in the early 1980’s. Until Ford’s current initiatives were created in 2010 the foundation did not have any specific programmatic emphasis on climate change. Joining CLUA (see above) allowed the Foundation to enter the climate change granting space through aligned grant making. This allowed Ford to incrementally grow their climate change funding over time. Funding to address climate change and food security concerns may continue in the coming years.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Moore Foundation • November 2013

Page 20 of 48

Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation seeks to advance environmental conservation, scientific research, and patient care, both globally and in the San Francisco Bay Area. The Foundation’s combination of programs and initiatives are guided by a set of core values including impact, integrity, disciplined approach, and collaboration.

Quick Facts

http://www.moore.org/

Total Annual Funding: ~$300 million

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities

Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A (does not track climate and agriculture designated funding as work is not currently organized as such)

Donor Type: Philanthropic Foundation Founded: 2000 Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A

The Moore Foundation does not currently have any initiatives specifically on climate change and agriculture. The Foundation’s work on conservation practices has positive climate change outcomes, but not with an explicit agricultural lens. Many efforts are focused on mitigating impacts from drivers of deforestation. The Foundation’s Environmental Conservation program includes conserving biodiversity and climate function in the Amazon Basin and fostering environmentally sound land use practices. The Foundation is a member of CLUA (see above) and therefore specific strategies related to land use change, specifically drivers of deforestation in Brazil, are aligned with CLUA’s strategy. Geographic Emphasis Andes/Amazon Region: Maintaining biodiversity Donor Evolution As part of its work in alignment with CLUA, the Moore Foundation provided short-term funding to The star represents a region in which this donor supports climate change support early capacity-building work and agriculture activities. on REDD+ in preparation for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Copenhagen, Denmark in 2009. The Foundation is currently looking into developing a program on sustainable agriculture, specifically on beef and soy production in South America. This program will include work to minimize the habitat impacts of producing these commodities.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | IDB • November 2013

Page 21 of 48

Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) is the leading source of development financing for Latin America and the Caribbean. IBD has a strong commitment to achieve measurable results, increased integrity, transparency, and accountability. IDB supports economic development by lending to central governments, provinces, municipalities, private firms, and non-governmental organizations through a wide range of programs and topics.

Quick Facts

http://www.iadb.org/

Total Annual Funding: $11.4 billion (lending and grants in 2012)

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities

Donor Type: Multilateral Founded: 1959 Composition: 48 member countries (including 26 borrowing members) Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: ~5 years

Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A (does not track climate and agriculture designated funding)

IDB’s primary goal for agriculture projects is to accelerate growth of agricultural output in Latin America and the Caribbean and to promote sustainable management of natural resources. IDB has Terms Used to Describe Climate financed projects addressing aspects of climate change Change and Agriculture Activities: for decades. The 2010 Ninth General Capital Increase  Adaptation to climate change for IDB included a Bank-wide mandate to dedicate  Mitigation of emissions 25% of funding to support the region’s adaptation to and mitigation of climate change by 2015. This emphasis applies IDB’s three primary instruments for administering agriculture-related funding: 

 

Specific Investment Loans: As IDB’s primary financing mechanisms, these loans support operations with large, interdependent components. These include climate change considerations early in project design, like factoring potential emissions mitigation opportunities in planning irrigation drainage projects. Policy-Based Loans: These loans focus on catalyzing reform or institutional changes, rather than directly financing on-the-ground initiatives. Technical Cooperation: These loans finance institutional strengthening activities that provide tools and training to translate lessons learned in one area or region to others. One example is translating techniques for low-emissions production of commodities in Brazil for European organic food markets to other countries, like Paraguay.

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture IDB’s lending for Agriculture and Rural Development is cyclical and shifts from year to year. For example, in 2011 IDB approved $623 million for agriculture projects and in 2012 approved $134 million. While many of these projects had direct or indirect links to climate change, IDB does not catalogue financing specifically related to climate change and agriculture.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | IDB • November 2013

Page 22 of 48

Geographic Emphasis IDB’s funding is channeled to its 26 borrowing members throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. Donor Evolution IDB has been funding activities that The star represents a region in which this donor supports climate change indirectly address climate change for and agriculture activities. decades. IDB has responded to the growing global concern about climate change by explicitly committing to fund climate-related activities across programs, including agriculture. Climate factors are being mainstreamed into many IDB-funded projects, both by adopting measures to adapt to changing climate patterns and by scaling techniques to mitigate emissions. IDB has supported projects with climate change mainstreamed into the project design in Argentina and Uruguay, and several others are under development. The Bank will continue to fulfill its mandate for 25% of funding for adaptation and mitigation by 2015, and will place particular emphasis on mitigation, adaptation, and sustainable practices.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | IFAD • November 2013

Page 23 of 48

International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) is a specialized agency of the United Nations that combats rural hunger and poverty in developing countries through a combination of low-interest loans and direct assistance. http://www.ifad.org/ Climate Change and Agriculture Activities IFAD addresses a wide range of rural policy issues from gender to community-driven development and has established one primary program to fund climate change and agriculture. 

Donor Type: Multilateral Founded: 1977 Composition: 172 member states (a full list is available at http://www.ifad.org/governance/ifad/ms.htm) Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 2 years Total Annual Funding: ~ $1 billion Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~12.5% Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities:

Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture  Climate-resilient agriculture Programme (ASAP): This program was  Multiple-benefit adaptation approaches launched by IFAD in 2012. It channels  Climate-smart agriculture for climate and environmental finance to smallholders smallholder farmers to bolster resilience to climate risks. ASAP is a multi-year and multi-donor program with the objective of improving the resilience and adaptive capacity of at least 8 million smallholder farmers in the face of rapidly changing environmental conditions. The program is a new source of grant co-financing for existing IFAD agricultural projects, adding activities related to climate risk management. Through ASAP, IFAD is driving a major scaling-up of successful “multiple-benefit” approaches to smallholder agriculture, seeking to improve production while simultaneously reducing and diversifying climate-related risks. Climate and Ag 12.5%

Other Initiatives 87.5%

Quick Facts

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture ASAP has mobilized $330 million since the program’s establishment in 2012. This represents approximately 12.5% of IFAD’s annual lending and granting budget of $1 billion. As of 30 September 2013, US$ 102 million have been programmed for ASAP-supported initiatives at country level.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | IFAD • November 2013

Page 24 of 48

Geographic Emphasis The program is focused on the world’s poorest and most vulnerable countries. Mozambique was the first project approved by the IFAD Executive Board in September 2012; 25 new ASAP investments are in an early or advanced stage of design, including countries from The solid dot represents a country in which this donor supports climate Asia (Bangladesh, Vietnam, Cambodia, change and agriculture activities. The hollow dots represent projects in development. Nepal), West and Central Africa (Mali, Nigeria, Chad, Ghana, Niger, Gambia, DR Congo, Cote d’ Ivoire), East and Southern Africa (Tanzania, Madagascar, Uganda, Lesotho, Rwanda, Kenya, Malawi), Latin America (Bolivia, Nicaragua), Near East/North Africa (Djibouti, Yemen, Sudan) and Central Asia (Kyrgyzstan). Donor Evolution IFAD’s funding has historically centered on poverty alleviation with agricultural development as an important component. IFAD began considering how to include climate change six years ago and developed a specific strategy relating to the impacts of a changing climate on smallholder production. IFAD developed a specific environmental strategy four years ago and subsequently developed a climate-specific strategy that was implemented and operationalized two years ago. Since the IFAD Climate Change Strategy was adopted in 2010, the organization has developed a number of processes and tools to integrate climate risk management and adaptation more systematically in its country strategies and operations. It is working with representatives from interested partner countries to incorporate sustainable agricultural intensification, land and water management and environmental stewardship into its programming. ASAP is an instrument to scale up resilient practices while facilitating the exchange of knowledge and experiences between countries over the long term.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | McKnight Foundation • November 2013

Page 25 of 48

McKnight Foundation The McKnight Foundation aims to improve quality of life for present and future generations and funds initiatives supporting children and youth, the Midwest region and communities, the environment, the arts, neuroscience research, and international efforts. McKnight’s primary geographic focus is the state of Minnesota, United States. http://www.mcknight.org/ Climate Change and Agriculture Activities One of McKnight’s programs employs an explicit agricultural approach and has climate co-benefits. Another program concentrates on water quality and has indirect impacts on both climate and agriculture.

Quick Facts Donor Type: Philanthropic Foundation Founded: 1953 Time Funding Climate Change and Agriculture: ~ 10 years through an explicit agriculture focus Total Annual Funding: $85 million (in 2012) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~7.3% Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities:



Collaborative Crop Research Program (CCRP):  Agro-ecological intensification for McKnight funds collaborative research with Collaborative Crop Research developing country agriculture research center Program (CCRP) scientists, university-based scientists, scientists from CGIAR centers, farmers, and development practitioners in 12 countries through a community of practice model.5 The program focuses on agro-ecological intensification encompassing approaches to agricultural and food systems that bolster farmers’ resilience to climate change impacts and mitigate agricultural emissions through ecological production systems.



Mississippi River Program: This program is intended to restore the water quality and resilience of the Mississippi River including mitigating nitrogen and phosphorous runoff from agricultural states on the northern part of the river. Many of the practices encouraged through this strategy have climate mitigation co-benefits but the program does not directly account for these impacts.

McKnight defines communities of practice as sets of regional grantees that collectively work to support a specific goal or outcome. 5

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | McKnight Foundation • November 2013 Climate and Ag ~7.3%

Page 26 of 48

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture

McKnight’s funding for CCRP specifically supporting agroecological intensification included $6.2 million for direct grants in 2012. This funding was jointly provided by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the McKnight Foundation, and accounted for approximately 7.3% of the Foundation’s total grant payout of $85 million in 2012. This funding did not apply to the Mississippi River Program. Other Initiatives ~92.7%

Geographic Emphasis Collaborative Crop Research Program: Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mozambique, Malawi, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia Mississippi River Program: Midwest United States (this program is not specifically related to agriculture and climate change, but has indirect benefits) Donor Evolution

The dots represent countries in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities.

McKnight initiated a food security program in 1983 that has evolved with McKnight’s learning approach. In the early 2000’s the Foundation established a clear focus on sustainable agricultural systems. In 2009 McKnight formalized the CCRP emphasis on agro-ecological intensification. Additionally, the Foundation recently established a new Midwest Climate and Energy program to work on clean energy policy, communities, and a resilient economy. The full scope of the Midwest Climate and Energy program including any work on agricultural systems is still in development.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | The Rockefeller Foundation • November 2013

Page 27 of 48

The Rockefeller Foundation The Rockefeller Foundation seeks to achieve its vision through work aimed at meeting four goals: Revalue Ecosystems, Advance Health, Secure Livelihoods, and Transform Cities.

Quick Facts Donor Type: Philanthropic Foundation Founded: 1913

http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/ Climate Change and Agriculture Activities Historically, the Rockefeller Foundation has been heavily involved in projects related to agriculture and climate change through projects like the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa and the Building Climate Change Resilience Initiative. Recently, Rockefeller has expanded its focus from working on climate smart agriculture to the broader aim of resilience.

Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 5 years (2007 – 2012) Total Annual Funding: ~$140 million (in 2010) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~5% Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities: 

Climate-smart agriculture

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture (2007-2012) Climate and Ag 5%

Since 2007 the Rockefeller Foundation has given approximately $6.5 million per year or 5% of annual giving to climate change and agriculture-related projects. Future funding levels for this work will be determined through strategic planning processes in 2013-14. Geographic Emphasis (2007-2015) East Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Ethiopia, and Rwanda): Outreach from smallholder farmers and national agricultural research entities.

Other Initiatives 95%

West Africa (Ghana): Carbon mapping Donor Evolution The Rockefeller Foundation has funded agriculture in different forms throughout the foundation’s 100-year existence. In 2007 the foundation established dedicated funding for climate change and agriculture as a part of its Building Climate Change Resilience Initiative. This initiative funded work related to integrating

The dots represent countries in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | The Rockefeller Foundation • November 2013

Page 28 of 48

climate change considerations into agricultural research, examining how carbon markets might apply capital and technical expertise to drive climate-smart agriculture, and implementing practices that included both adaptation to climate change and mitigation of emissions by demonstrating low carbon intensity and sequestering carbon. This stream of funding was consolidated in 2012. The Rockefeller Foundation will continue to fund several legacy projects with ties to climate change and agriculture through grant term completion. While the scope of some future projects may include climate change and agriculture, climate change is likely to be mainstreamed into Rockefeller’s work on Resilience and Revaluing Ecosystems.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Skoll Foundation • November 2013

Page 29 of 48

Skoll Foundation The Skoll Foundation was created to drive large scale change by investing in, connecting, and celebrating social entrepreneurs and the innovators who help solve the world’s most pressing problems. The Foundation defines social entrepreneurs as society’s change agents, creators of innovations that disrupt the status quo and transform the world for the better. The Foundation identifies organizations and programs that are already bringing positive change to the world and empowers them to extend their reach and deepen their impact. http://www.skollfoundation.org/ Climate Change and Agriculture Activities

Quick Facts Donor Type: Philanthropic Foundation Founded: 1999 Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 14 years (indirectly) Total Annual Funding: ~$48 million (Grants awarded in 2012) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A (does not track climate and agriculture designated funding)

Term(s) Used to Describe Climate The Skoll Foundation does not have a program that Change and Agriculture Activities: focuses explicitly on agriculture and climate change. N/A (focuses on investing in social However, the foundation’s areas of emphasis have entrepreneurship) many ties to climate change adaptation, emissions mitigation, improved land tenure, and other practices through the Foundation’s emphasis on fostering social entrepreneurship. The Skoll Foundation’s work includes conducting independent analysis to inform grant making in some areas with high relevance to the intersection of climate change and agriculture. For example, the Foundation recently commissioned a study about catalyzing smallholder investment finance to identify strategies to increase production and encourage sustainable management of natural resources. Several examples of areas where the Foundation provides resources that indirectly result in agriculture and climate change-related changes include: 

Addressing drivers of deforestation in the Amazon: Identifying and enabling creative solutions for farming and ranching to improve land stewardship that also result in emissions mitigation.



Sustainable municipal management: Facilitating robust, transparent land use planning for cattle and soy production and enabling small-scale producers to obtain land titles with indirect emission mitigation benefits.



Sustainable value chains and market development: Working with small farmers to finance beneficial practices and develop access to markets. This includes providing finance for small farmers in Africa and Latin America to implement climate-resilient practices with a longterm supply chain lens.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Skoll Foundation • November 2013



Page 30 of 48

Reducing extreme poverty for smallholder farmers: Implementing low-cost technologies to improve agricultural production for smallholders with an indirect emissions mitigation cobenefit such as mitigating emissions from diesel-powered irrigation systems through drip irrigation systems.

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture The Skoll Foundation provides funding through Skoll Awards for Social Entrepreneurship. These are typically grants of $1 million over a three year period. The Foundation has dispersed over $115 million through this program since 1999 and more than $403 million overall including through Program Related Investments. Several Skoll awards may be concentrated in a particular area among organizations working on similar issues (e.g., drivers of deforestation in the Amazon). This funding is not typically targeted to a particular issue or effort, but rather provides core support to help grantees build systems and maximize impact. Geographic Emphasis Latin America: Addressing drivers of deforestation, sustainable municipal management, sustainable value chains Africa: Sustainable value chains and reducing extreme poverty for smallholders South Asia: Reducing extreme poverty for smallholders

The stars represent regions in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities.

Donor Evolution The Skoll Foundation will continue to invest in organizations working to create innovative solutions to some of the world’s most intractable problems that can be applied at a broader scale. The Foundation will continue to seek strategies to maximize impact and improve sustainability through empowerment. Several of the projects the Skoll Foundation supports demonstrate the indirect benefits this approach can have for climate change and agriculture outcomes (e.g., reduced greenhouse gas emissions achieved through support to sustainable municipal land management, or improved resilience to climate change factors achieved through support to market and value chain development).

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Syngenta Foundation • November 2013

Page 31 of 48

Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture Syngenta Foundation’s mission is to create value for resource-poor small farmers in developing countries through innovation in sustainable agriculture and the activation of value chains. The Foundation works with partners in developing countries and emerging markets to help small farmers become more professional growers, focusing on areas with potential for significant agricultural expansion. www.syngentafoundation.org Climate Change and Agriculture Activities Syngenta Foundation acts as an incubator of scalable solutions for sub-commercial smallholder farmers6 by building partnerships and facilitating knowledge transfer. Climate change considerations are implicit in many of the projects the Foundation supports. The Foundation prioritizes work based on farmers’ business needs using the frame of sustainable intensification to guide three types of investments:

Quick Facts Donor Type: Corporate Foundation Founded: 2001 Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 12 years Total Annual Funding: $17 million (2013 budget) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: N/A (does not track climate and agriculture designated funding) Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities: N/A (The Foundation considers the need to empower farmers to adapt to and help mitigate the effects of climate change as central to any strategy of agricultural and rural development. A key element of this is ‘payment for environmental services’ which in turn calls for conducive policies and project design).



Knowledge: Focusing on agricultural services and transfer of knowledge, including developing improved extension programs.



Tools: Supporting progress in agricultural research and development by improving technology and product development.



Opportunities: Promoting policy change, financial mechanisms, market development, and thought leadership to improve the institutional environment in which farmers operate.

Syngenta Foundation explicitly supports climate change and agriculture by investing in the World Bank BioCarbon Fund to direct more of the Fund’s resources toward agriculture. Syngenta Foundation’s funding structure is highly partnership-based. Some examples of successful partnerships include: 

6

Partnership with the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and Syngenta Corporation to develop drought tolerant maize varieties for small farms in South

Sub-commercial smallholder farmers are not actively engaged in selling their goods in a marketplace.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | Syngenta Foundation • November 2013



Page 32 of 48

Asia. This project leverages CIMMYT’s phenotyping capacity and Syngenta’s genotyping capacity to generate mutual gains from different organizational strengths. Ag Partner XChange, a partnership with the GATD Foundation, which works to improve global capacity for public-private partnerships that engage small-scale farmers.

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture Syngenta Foundation deploys funding to sustainably improve productivity in primary production and help small farmers earn income from their crops. The Foundation emphasizes bringing emerging technologies to a scalable point and to broadly disseminate key knowledge useful to farmers. Public-private partnerships are a primary mechanism for Syngenta Foundation to conduct this work. These partnerships combine the resources and capabilities needed to address farmers' problems including those resulting from climate change. The Foundation’s budget for 2013 is $17 million. Geographic Emphasis Syngenta Foundation provides funds to develop knowledge, tools, and opportunities for smallholders in India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Mali, Honduras, Brazil, and Peru. Donor Evolution

The dots represent countries in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities.

Until recently, Syngenta Foundation was working to develop a portfolio of proven innovations and is now moving to scale these approaches by incubating businesses. Syngenta Foundation will continue to pursue maximizing impacts, building capacity, and applying a business innovation lens. The Foundation’s activities will have climate-relevant impacts by promoting technological advances to adapt to climate change effects in specific geographies. The Foundation will continue to invest in the BioCarbon Fund in order to identify new markets for smallholders participating in carbon credit generation and continue to promote technologies like no- or low-till agriculture, improved nutrient use efficiency, and seed development. The Foundation will seek to scale its investments beyond pilot projects and pursue opportunities like making agricultural carbon a main-stream source of regular farmer income.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | USAID • November 2013

Page 33 of 48

United States Agency for International Development (USAID) United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is the United States federal agency responsible for administering foreign aid to support economic, humanitarian, and development assistance. USAID has programs across many sectors including: agriculture and food security; democracy; human rights; governance; economic growth and trade; education; environment and global climate change; gender equality and women’s empowerment; global health science, technology and innovation; water and sanitation; and crises and conflict resolution.

Quick Facts

http://www.usaid.gov/

Percentage of USAID Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: 6% in FY 2012

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities

Donor Type: Bilateral Founded: 1961 Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: ~ 13 years Total Annual USAID Funding: $21.8 billion (Total funding for USAID managed and partially managed accounts in FY 2012)

Term(s) Used to Describe Climate USAID administers several programs with links to Change and Agriculture Activities: food and climate within the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance, the Bureau for  Climate-smart agriculture Food Security, and the Bureau for Economic Growth,  Sustainable intensification Education and Environment. USAID leads two government-wide presidential development initiatives that have a more explicit link between climate change and agriculture. 

Feed the Future: Feed the Future, the U.S. Government’s global hunger and food security initiative, helps partner countries develop their agriculture sectors in order to spur economic growth and trade to increase incomes and reduce hunger, poverty, and undernutrition. Led by USAID, Feed the Future is a whole-of-government initiative that capitalizes on the resources and expertise of ten federal agencies. Feed the Future efforts promote agriculture sector growth, improved nutrition, and climate-smart development. Some Feed the Future programs include adaptation and mitigating emissions that contribute to global climate change.



Global Climate Change Initiative: USAID is also a leader in the U.S. Government’s Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI) which focuses on three areas: clean energy; sustainable landscapes; and adaptation. GCCI prioritizes agriculture work that builds resilience to the impacts of climate change and promotes farming systems which reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sequester carbon.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | USAID • November 2013

Page 34 of 48

Financing for Each Activity Combined funding for Feed the Future in FY 2012 totaled $972.7 million. USAID funding for GCCI in FY 2012 totaled $348 million. Geographic Emphasis Feed the Future: Bangladesh, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nepal, Rwanda, Senegal, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia Global Climate Change Initiative: The stars represent regions and the dots represent countries in which this The Global Climate Change Initiative’s donor supports climate change and agriculture activities. funding focus is aligned with USAID’s target aid regions, including Latin America, the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africa, and South and Southeast Asia. The Initiative allocates funding for specific countries based in three focus areas: Clean Energy programs in countries projected to significantly increase GHG emissions; Sustainable Landscapes programs in countries with globally important forests; and Adaptation programs in least developed countries, small island developing states, and glacier-dependent countries. Donor Evolution Since its founding, USAID has played a major role in combatting global hunger through food assistance as well as agricultural development programs primarily on research and technology, capacity building, markets and credit access. At the 2009 G8 Summit in L'Aquila, Italy, President Obama laid the foundation for Feed the Future when he pledged to invest at least $3.5 billion over three years to enhance global agriculture and food security with several crosscutting areas, including gender integration and climate-smart development. This initial U.S. commitment helped to leverage more than $18 billion from other donors. In 2012, the G8, in partnership with African governments, established the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, which places a special emphasis on nutrition, private sector investment and policy improvements in Sub-Saharan African countries. The U.S. contributes to the New Alliance in part through its Feed the Future activities. USAID first established a global climate change team in 1990 that supported a range of agriculture-related activities including modeling and capacity building. In recent years, USAID has renewed its focus on climate change, food security, and resilience, including the Global Climate Change Initiative. USAID leads ongoing discussions as part of a Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) working group, which helps design CSA capacity for USAID staff and implementing partners. USAID also leads the U.S. government’s participation in Tropical Forest Alliance 2020, a public-private partnership to reduce the tropical deforestation associated with commodities such as palm oil, soy, beef, and paper and pulp.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | World Bank • November 2013

Page 35 of 48

World Bank Agriculture and Environmental Services The World Bank provides financial and technical assistance to developing countries. The Bank is focused on reducing global poverty by providing policy advice, research and analysis, and supporting capacity development across sectors. http://www.worldbank.org/

Quick Facts Donor Type: Multilateral Founded: 1944 (IBRD); 1960 (IDA) Composition: The World Bank is composed of two institutions: 

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities The World Bank supports hundreds of projects with climate and agriculture components all over the globe. The Bank is in the process of cataloguing activities within the realm of crop and livestock agriculture, forestry, and grassland management to identify which of the three principles of climate-smart agriculture each project delivers: 1) productivity; 2) resilience; and 3) mitigation. This effort will help fill existing information gaps and assist in determining how best to structure and operationalize ventures that capitalize on opportunities to combine and manage tradeoffs between these principles. Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture Ag and climate 6.2%

Other Initiatives 93.8%



The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), with 188 member countries; and The International Development Association (IDA), with 172 member countries

Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: Directly, ~5 years; indirectly since founding Total Annual Funding: $35.3 billion (in 2012) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~6.2% Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities: 

Climate-smart agriculture

The Bank provides low-interest loans, interest-free credits, and grants to developing countries. The Bank also facilitates financing through trust fund partnerships with bilateral and multilateral donors that address needs across a wide range of sectors and developing regions. In 2012, the World Bank (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Development Association) lent $7.1 billion for mitigation measures and $4.6 billion for adaptation across all sectors (e.g., energy and mining, finance, transportation). $852 million or 12% of the mitigation lending was channeled specifically to the agriculture, fishing, and forestry sectors. $1.33 billion or 29% of adaptation lending supported those sectors. This combined $2.2 billion of lending to support mitigation and adaptation activities for agriculture, fishing, and forestry accounted for approximately 6.2% of the Bank’s overall lending portfolio of $35.3 billion.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | World Bank • November 2013

Page 36 of 48

Geographic Emphasis The World Bank has a global lending portfolio for its climate and agriculture-related activities.

Donor Evolution The publication of the 2008 World Development Report on Agriculture The ellipse represents a global focus. for Development led to an explicit Bank-wide emphasis on food security, landscapes, and policy mechanisms, including the interplay between climate change and agricultural production. One of the pillars of the Bank’s plan to catalyze climate action is supporting climate-smart agriculture (CSA). The Bank plans to help build an Action Alliance that promotes the triple win of CSA: increasing yields and income; making farms more resilient to climate change; and reducing emissions from agricultural practices. The Bank will publish a Climate Action Plan in early to mid-2014 that will establish an overall strategy for addressing climate change through World Bank programming. Each sector will produce operational guidelines to align with this strategy. The guidelines for climate and agriculture activities will be informed by the ongoing cataloguing effort to better identify projects related to the three principles of climate-smart agriculture.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | World Bank BioCarbon Fund • November 2013

Page 37 of 48

World Bank BioCarbon Fund The World Bank BioCarbon Fund was the first carbon fund established to focus specifically on land use. It is a public-private sector initiative designed to mobilize financing to help develop and implement projects that sequester carbon in forest and agro-ecosystems. The BioCarbon Fund pays for land-based carbon emissions reductions mostly from projects implemented on degraded lands in developing countries. Its funding throughout the last decade has helped develop infrastructure needed to pilot transactions in a growing land-use carbon market.

Quick Facts

https://wbcarbonfinance.org/BioCF

Term(s) Used to Describe Climate Change and Agriculture Activities:

Climate Change and Agriculture Activities

Donor Type: Multilateral Founded: 2004 Time Granting in Climate Change and Agriculture: 5 years Total Funding: $90 million over 16 years (2004-2020) Percentage of Funding for Climate Change and Agriculture: ~2.4%



Sustainable agricultural land management Resilience Mitigation

The BioCarbon Fund supports activities focused on  restoring degraded lands and sequestering carbon in  fuel wood production, timber production, assisted natural regeneration, plantation installations, forest restoration, and conserving forests through REDD+. A small portion of the BioCarbon Fund supports agricultural activities specifically. Some afforestation and reforestation projects have also included agriculture although the carbon crediting has been for the forest component. 

Sustainable Agricultural Land Management: BioCarbon Fund supports projects that promote the adoption of sustainable land management techniques to revive or increase the productivity of agricultural systems. These techniques include cover cropping, crop rotation, mulching, compost management, agroforestry, and use of organic fertilizers. The use of these practices has increased crop yields and increased resilience to climate change on degraded lands. The BioCarbon Fund developed the first-ever carbon accounting methodology for Sustainable Agricultural Land Management practices. Ag and Climate 2.4%

Other Initiatives 97.6%

Financing for Climate Change and Agriculture Since its creation in 2004, the BioCarbon Fund has allocated approximately $90 million to various land-use projects. 1.8% of this funding has supported sustainable agricultural land management and .6% has supported agroforestry initiatives. Agricultural-related funding with a mitigation component comprises 2.4% of the BioCarbon Fund’s portfolio. There are currently six governments and public entities and 11 private companies investing in the BioCarbon Fund although not all

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture | World Bank BioCarbon Fund • November 2013

Page 38 of 48

of these partners have contributed to the portion of those funds that are deployed for agricultural projects. Geographic Emphasis Sustainable Agricultural Land Management: Kenya Agroforestry: Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of Congo Donor Evolution

The dots represent countries in which this donor supports climate change and agriculture activities.

The BioCarbon Fund is building on its past successes by establishing a new tranche to incentivize better land management at the landscape level, combining afforestation/reforestation, REDD+, agriculture, and biomass energy activities into an integrated approach to mitigate climate change, enhance food security, and increase the resilience of local communities and environments at a much larger scale. The BioCarbon Fund will continue working through its model of results-based payments using emission reductions as a basis. The next tranche of BioCarbon Fund resources is currently being assembled. It is expected that the share of funding devoted to supporting sustainable agricultural land use activities will increase.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 39 of 48

Donor-Identified Trends In addition to providing insight into their own organization’s portfolios supporting climate change and agriculture interventions, many interviewees identified emerging substantive and funding trends they felt might be useful to share with others. Substantive Trends Climate Change Mainstreaming: Many donors are mainstreaming climate change across their existing programs. By factoring climate change into project design from the outset these donors build climate response measures into all planned interventions. Donors indicated that when applied to agriculture projects, this mainstreaming approach fosters a better understanding of how climate change impacts agricultural productivity and how agricultural activities contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Gender Considerations: Several donors observed that gender and women’s issues are gaining increased attention in the climate change and agriculture arena. There is growing recognition among donors that climate change disproportionately affects women and their families and that women are critical to implementing solutions to address climate challenges in the agricultural sector and at the farm level. Empowering women in the agricultural sector to address the challenges created by a changing climate is of growing interest for many donors. Landscape and Integrated Approaches: Historically agriculture, forests, and land use changes have been viewed, managed, and funded separately. Many of those interviewed noted an unfolding interest in landscape scale interventions by governments, policy makers, the private sector, donors, and other stakeholders. They observed that on-the-ground realities demand more integrated approaches to ensure more complete implementation and to account for successful land-use activities that currently fall through the cracks of existing policy, management, and financing mechanisms. Interviewees indicated that there may be opportunities to re-shape some of the rules about land-based carbon accounting, which could facilitate the development of greater diversity in land-use projects. High Quality Data and Access: Several donors pointed out that improved farmer access to credible, useful, and timely agricultural and climate data could have a potentially transformative effect on livelihoods and production. Providing smallholders with access to weather data, basic mapping, market information, and other tools may help these farmers mitigate risks and become more climate-friendly. Many, including private sector companies, are generating this type of data and exploring how to make it freely or inexpensively available to smallholder farmers and others through a variety of means including mobile and smartphone technology.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 40 of 48

Funding Trends Bilateral Donors Collaborating with Multilateral Donors for Implementation: Several of those interviewed suggested a trend of bilateral donors increasingly using multilateral donors as a complementary implementation mechanism to directly funding climate change and agriculture through their own programs. The rationale behind this consolidation differs across donors. For example, some indicated that this approach provides greater opportunities for scalability while others noted that it helps to mitigate some of the risk associated with undertaking significant, large scale new projects. Proliferation of New, Smaller Donors: In a parallel trend, there appears to be a growing number of smaller donors in the climate change and agriculture funding space. Their interventions range from acting alone to working in concert with other smaller donors, with social venture companies, or as part of larger public-private partnerships. Some of the small funders have been supporting innovative pilot projects that might be perceived as too smallscale or too risky to attract funding from larger traditional donors. Some of these funders provide startup funds to incubate projects and help connect and leverage the strengths of other organizations working in a particular arena. There is an opportunity for these donors’ activities to complement and inform those of larger bilateral donors and multilateral donors. Traditional Development Assistance and Results-Based Payments: Several of those interviewed indicated that there is an evolving understanding, appreciation, and, at times, complimentary utilization of traditional development assistance and results-based payments. Traditional development assistance in this context means financial aid in the form of grants intended to support the economic, social, environmental, and political development through specific projects or activities (i.e. programmatic funding). Results-based payments link donor disbursements to the recipient’s achievement of mutually agreed upon and sometimes independently verifiable results. Donors interviewed emphasized that although these are sometimes framed as contrasting approaches, in practice there is often overlap between them and they do not necessarily need to be conceptualized as a dichotomy. Donors frequently employ both approaches to achieve positive changes in agriculture, forestry, land-use, and development. Results-based payments do not always focus exclusively on the final outcome (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions reduction). Instead, many donors are increasingly supporting results-based financing for activities that range from institutional capacity-building to intermediate outputs (e.g., number of trainings conducted or new technologies implemented in a certain time period). Results-based approaches have yet to be used in the land use/agriculture space to the extent they have been drawn upon in the other sectors (e.g., health, education, transportation) but are attracting greater attention.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 41 of 48

The Evolving Carbon Market: The carbon market system was initially developed by the private sector to access carbon credits through the UNFCCC climate finance mechanism.7 These credits were initially limited to reforestation by market rules. Deforestation, forest degradation, and agriculture were viewed as uncertain and having limited policy, political, or technical support. Consequently, most early work on land-based carbon was initiated in the form of pilot projects. A few donors suggested that in the future the private sector may engage more actively as land use accounting and policy rules are re-shaped and there may eventually be an expanded role for carbon credits from agriculture. Private Sector Supply Chain: National and global companies, including large commodity, food, agriculture, and consumer goods firms that drive demand for raw materials, have begun to review the environmental and social implications and long-term viability of their supply chains. In some cases agricultural activities in the supply chain are drivers of deforestation. A growing number of companies are reviewing current land practices that increase climate vulnerability of natural and human systems associated with sourcing commodities and other inputs to their products. Companies’ pursuit of predictable supplies that also meet policy standards and public goals may encourage innovation in sourcing materials and the use of best practices. These activities may complement and perhaps redirect future donor investments in this space

For more information about UNFCCC climate financing, see https://unfccc.int/cooperation_support/financial_mechanism/finance_portal/items/5824.php. 7

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 42 of 48

Meridian Observations Many of the details included in the donor profiles (above) represent a shortened, but vetted, summary using the individual donors’ own written information or a validation of Meridian’s description based upon the interview conducted. This information has been reviewed and revised by each donor and the reader should have confidence in its accuracy. The following section comprises Meridian Institute’s analysis of the information shared during interviews. It does not represent the view of any particular donor. Donor Descriptions of Activities Donors use a number of concepts and terms to describe the activities they support related to climate change and agriculture (e.g., adaptation, sustainable intensification, mitigation, resilience). Some donors do not explicitly define what particular terms or concepts mean to them in the context of their funding strategies. This is not unusual given the interplay and interdependencies of the complex set of issues inherent in the climate change and agriculture space and range of scales–from the farm to policy levels. However, this lack of consistent use of concepts can pose a challenge in matching particular terms or concepts with particular outcomes or funding levels across donors. For example, it appears that in some cases donors use different terms (e.g., adaptation and resilience) interchangeably while others make a distinction between what appear to be similar, related, or overlapping concepts. Some donors may also interpret the same term to embody a range of diverse or differing principles or practices based on each donor’s history or perspective. Several donors characterize the term resilience differently based on contextual factors that are not always clearly defined (e.g., resilience in the context of sustainability at the farmer level or resilience of an entire agricultural system to the impacts of climate change), for example. This different use of concepts and terms creates a challenge in understanding and conveying each donor’s funding activities in juxtaposition with others. In addition to communication challenges, the lack of consistent language and interpretation of concepts should cause readers of this report should use caution when drawing comparative conclusions. Donor Entry Points Funders support work with implications for climate change and agriculture at international, national, regional, community, and farm-level scales. These activities range from on-the-ground projects to policy-level interventions across multiple sectors, spanning a variety of scopes, focuses, and entry points. Based on the interviews conducted, there appear to be four broad categories that characterize different entry points donors use to fund climate change and agriculture activities. These entry

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 43 of 48

points affect the relative ease or challenge of isolating the amount of funding each donor is committing to agriculture and climate change activities. 

Direct Agriculture Support with Climate Change “Add-on”: Many donors have longstanding programming explicitly focused on agricultural development. Some of these donors are adding a climate change component to existing agricultural programs and projects. In some cases the climate change “add on” is explicit and donors can easily point to the relative increment of agricultural development support dedicated to climate.



Direct Agriculture Support with Climate Change Integrated: Other donors who have historically funded agricultural development have integrated climate co-benefits into existing programs and projects without explicitly accounting for the added funding level.



Direct Climate Change and Agriculture Support: Some donors have established explicit funding streams to support activities directly relating to climate change and agriculture. In some cases these are new, standalone programs with independent budgets.



Indirect Climate Change and Agriculture Support: Some donors have named priorities that are neither climate change nor agriculture (e.g., social entrepreneurship, water quality, energy efficiency). However, some of the activities these donors support either directly or indirectly result in positive climate change and agriculture impacts.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 44 of 48

Donor Entry Points: The figure below demonstrates the effects of applying a climate change and agriculture lens to several examples of funding streams with direct and indirect focus on climate and agriculture. Using this frame can improve understanding of how a range of donor activities can result in contributions to climate change and agriculture from indirect entry points.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 45 of 48

Geographic Areas of Focus Each dot in the figure below corresponds to a specific country in which donors support efforts related to climate change and agriculture. Hollow dots correspond to planned efforts. Each star corresponds to a general region where work is underway. These regions include Central America, Caribbean, North America, South Asia, Southeast Asia/Oceania, East Asia, East, West, Southern Africa, and, where indicated by donors, the entire African continent. This map does not represent every project that each donor is funding, but provides an overview of the general regions where each donor’s activities are focused, and some specific countries where indicated by donors.  

AfDB BioCF



CDKN

 CLUA 

DFATD

 DFID  Ford 

IDB

 IFAD   Donors with globally oriented strategies

McKnight Moore

 Packard 

Rockefeller

 USAID   

Skoll Syngenta World Bank

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 46 of 48

View of Partnerships During the course of the project the team discovered that many of the donors interviewed use the term partners in very different ways. Some refer to grantees or country recipients of sustained funding as partners, while others use the term primarily to describe co-funders (e.g., other philanthropies and other bi-laterals) who can amplify the effects of investments. Some donors (e.g., CLUA) utilize formal coordinated grant making strategies to align funding, while others form ad hoc alliances to address specific needs. The growing prevalence of public-private partnerships, impact investing,8 and other multiinstitutional funding approaches will further the diversification and evolution of donor partnerships. The formation of targeted alliances that leverage the individual strengths of donors in concert with others may increase donor flexibility and help improve positive impacts of funding for climate change and agriculture. Throughout the interviews several donors pointed to existing networks and alliances of donors that are emerging in the climate change and agriculture space. This list, while not exhaustive, may serve as a reference point for others interested in learning more about information sharing and coordinated approaches to grantmaking. Existing Donor Networks Sustainable Agriculture & Food Systems Funders (SAFSF): SAFSF is an international network of 84 donors that works to foster communication, shared learning, and information exchange about issues connected to sustainable agriculture and food systems. Climate and Energy Funders (part of Consultative Group on Biological Diversity): The Mission of the Climate and Energy Funders Group is to expand the field of climate and energy philanthropy, and to promote collaborative, strategic grant making among its members. European Environmental Funders Group (EEFG): The EEFG is a network of European foundations active in the fields of environment, sustainable development and climate change. It provides a platform for learning, networking and the identification of synergies with a view to developing common activities. Global Donor Platform for Rural Development: The Global Donor Platform for Rural Development is a network of 34 bilateral and multilateral donors, international financing institutions, intergovernmental organizations and development agencies. Members share a common vision that agriculture and rural development is central to poverty reduction, and a conviction that sustainable and efficient development requires a coordinated global approach.

8

See footnote 2 above.

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 47 of 48

Possible Areas for Future Exploration Over the course of this effort, many interviewees suggested that further mapping could be useful since so much of the relevant donor landscape remains unexplored. They cited the potential benefits of better understanding what other donors are doing to calibrate their own strategies and to identify opportunities for greater impact through potential coordination or collaboration. While the donor profiles included in this report provide an overview of some donors’ activities, funding levels, geographic focus, and evolution over time, a further assessment could delve more deeply into the complexities of these donors’ and others’ approaches. Several areas of possible further exploration were identified: 

A more complete characterization of donors and investors in the climate change and agriculture space: o Broader group of donors and donor types: In the last decade, the climate change and agriculture donor arena has diversified and now increasingly includes: aid from emerging-economies; public-private partnerships; social ventures in research; and impact-investors. Donors and implementers would benefit from a more comprehensive understanding of these new actors to inform their activities and identify potential traditional and non-traditional partners. Additionally, a more comprehensive donor mapping effort could include a larger group of “traditional” donors—bilateral donors, multilateral donors, and philanthropies. o Deeper analysis of donor activities: Donors and implementers would benefit from a more in-depth analysis of donor activities. This could include the application of more rigorous quantitative and qualitative methodologies to inform a more sophisticated and complete overview as well as an analysis pinpointing critical gaps.



Meta-funding trends: o

Complementarity between consolidation collaboration of bilateral donors & proliferation of smaller donors: Further assessment could explore the nature and impacts of the parallel funding trends of bilateral donors increasingly pooling their funds into larger multilateral institutions for implementation and smaller donors supporting the development and pilot testing of innovative agriculture practices often coinciding with innovative funding and investment approaches. Exploring these trends in more depth could help identify how these groups of donors might complement and build on each other’s work and bring new information to bear on addressing climate change and agriculture as well as mechanisms to pilot activities and take them to scale.

o

Movement toward landscape approaches: A diverse set of donors is increasingly considering integrated or landscape approaches in their funding and investment activities related to agriculture, deforestation, and land use change. Improved

Donor Mapping | Climate Change and Agriculture • November 2013

Page 48 of 48

understanding of this trend could yield valuable insights about how to pursue this approach in the policy context and on the ground. 

Better understanding of co-benefits: During the interview process, the Meridian team learned that while some donors focus the entry point of their programming on a particular concept (e.g., adaptation) it may be possible to integrate co-benefits (e.g. mitigation, livelihood improvements, increased resilience) into overall project design and accounting. Since climate change benefits and activities are often interrelated there may be opportunities to understand and measure co-benefits that result from donor funding even if these benefits are not overtly referenced. Identifying strategies to catalogue these relationships could prove helpful as donors continue to mainstream climate change factors into their overall funding portfolios and apply integrated, multisectoral lens to their grant-making strategies.

This project was undertaken and supported with the understanding that as a first effort, this assessment is by definition an incomplete overview landscape of donors supporting agriculture and climate change activities around the world. The purpose of this assessment was to uncover useful trends, provide enough information to motivate further investigation, and offer even modest insight into the status of the current funding landscape that might inform further inquiry. This report: described the primary substantive and funding trends of seventeen donors; summarized how each donor described their activities, emphases, and approach to funding climate change and agriculture activities; and identified key trends and information gaps associated with this funding space. We hope this report helps the participating donors and implementing partners learn about approaches others are taking, elicits questions about these approaches, provides insight into the evolution of donor’s approaches, and motivates others to engage in this critical area of work.

Report Authors and Contact Information Meridian Institute would like to once again thank the donors who participated in this assessment and The Rockefeller Foundation for its support of this undertaking. With any questions regarding this assessment, please contact:

Michael Lesnick, Ph.D. Senior Partner Meridian Institute +1-202-256-5900 [email protected]

Kristy Buckley Senior Mediator & Program Manager Meridian Institute +1-202-701-0956 [email protected]

Robyn Paulekas Mediator & Program Associate Meridian Institute +1-970-513-8340 x 235 [email protected]

Selena Elmer Project Associate & Fellow Meridian Institute +1-202-354-6445 [email protected]